(Phys.org) -- Rapid increases and unpredictable fluctuations in gas prices annoy many drivers, especially since it may seem that oil companies are secretly conspiring to keep prices high by forming a cartel in an effort to increase their profits. But a new study shows that cartel-like price dynamics of certain commodities, such as gasoline, can emerge spontaneously in a strategic model without any collusion among the sellers. The finding doesn’t necessarily mean that companies don’t intentionally form cartels, but the possibility of self-organized cartel formation could have implications for market regulations.

The researchers, physicists Tiago P. Peixoto and Stefan Bornholdt of the University of Bremen in Bremen, Germany, have published their study, called “No Need for Conspiracy: Self-Organized Cartel Formation in a Modified Trust Game,” in a recent issue of Physical Review Letters.

“Our work shows that, under very reasonable and simple assumptions of the market dynamics, cartel-like behavior can emerge, without an explicit agreement between sellers,” Bornholdt told Phys.org. “This is, to our knowledge, completely new and we feel that it comes somewhat unexpected, for example in the context of German gasoline price discussions in the media. For example, a few months ago, the German governmental cartel agency searched the offices of large gasoline companies in search of evidence of cartel behavior. We asked ourselves if a cartel-like dynamics could emerge by itself, without leaving traces of evidence. As gas prices in Germany were – and still are – strongly fluctuating in time and space, this made us curious whether this could be a sign for an interesting collective dynamics, of gas sellers, interacting with each other in a funny way.”

The spontaneous emergence of cartel-like behavior appears in a model that the researchers developed, which is based on a real-life market scenario. The model involves one million agents, each of whom has the role of both buyer and seller of a necessary commodity, such as groceries or (for drivers) gasoline. As buyers, the agents must buy the product in question, but they can choose which seller they buy from. As sellers, the agents can set their price, knowing that too low of a price will not make them much profit, and too high of a price will drive buyers away to another seller.

As the game evolves, buyers and sellers continuously update their strategies: buyers change where they shop by comparing prices, and sellers raise or lower their prices by replicating the prices of other sellers who have higher profits.

The key variable in the game is who can update their strategy the fastest. If buyers can update their strategy at a fast rate relative to sellers, the model shows that the pricing favors the buyers. Since the sellers offering the lowest prices will profit most, other sellers will replicate these low prices until all sellers have the same low price.

But if sellers can update their strategy at a fast rate above a critical value compared to buyers, then the entire population of sellers benefits at the expense of all the buyers. This is because the sellers are quick enough to copy the high prices of more profitable sellers before the buyers have a chance to react. Soon, there are no low-priced options available, marking the emergence of a cartel-like phase.

“Our work shows that the deciding factor for whether a cartel can self-organize is the relative speed of buyers in comparison to sellers in updating their strategy,” Bornholdt said. “For consumers, price comparison websites and smartphone apps can be a potential means to react more quickly to price changes. If a global and real-time ranking of sellers is available, this could significantly thwart a cartel-like scenario. Note that the mere existence of such catalogs is not enough, it has to be used by a significant portion of the buyers; otherwise it has no effect, since a small number of buyers will not be able to benefit from it in the long run.”

Unlike the first scenario where prices settle at a stable low point, in the cartel-like scenario the model shows that the high prices fluctuate tremendously due to the ongoing competition among sellers, sometimes dipping down to reasonable prices. The price fluctuations are highest at relative strategy update rates close to the critical value, demonstrating typical critical behavior. When the sellers’ strategy update rate far exceeds the critical value, the price fluctuations diminish somewhat, but remain significant.

The model also shows another interesting feature of these price fluctuations: the average price often rises very quickly and decreases more slowly. This type of oscillation, called an Edgeworth price cycle, is often observed in real life and can be predicted by simple models when just two sellers are involved. In contrast, the model used here incorporates numerous sellers as well as the impact of buyer behavior, providing a more realistic system. Nevertheless, the researchers explain that using the model to predict future prices would be difficult, since the price cycle dynamics are aperiodic and not easily predictable.

However, the results could still be useful for market regulation, where regulators often discuss whether price fluctuations result from collusion among companies in an attempt to increase profit. If sellers are just quick to individually update their pricing strategies, then high gas prices may simply be a natural result of the market. The researchers plan to improve the model in the future.

“The model can be made more realistic in a number of ways, in particular by implementing spatial constraints (a cheaper gas station which is 100 km away is not a viable option),” Bornholdt said. “Spatial constraints can sometimes significantly alter the dynamics in this type of system.”

The right feedback design can be critical to the long-term success of online marketplaces and auction sites, and they can also help consumers become better shoppers, according to a study from the Sauder School of Business ...

Ever find a bargain online, only to realize that the cost of shipping doubles how much you’ll pay? Shipping-and-handling sticker shock accounts for about 30 percent of all online shopping cart abandonment, but prior research ...

Recommended for you

Traditional computers manipulate electrons to turn our keystrokes and Google searches into meaningful actions. But as components of the computer processor shrink to only a few atoms across, those same electrons become unpredictable ...

In a new blow for the futuristic "supersymmetry" theory of the universe's basic anatomy, experts reported fresh evidence Monday of subatomic activity consistent with the mainstream Standard Model of particle physics.

The laws of classical mechanics are independent of the direction of time, but whether the same is true in quantum mechanics has been a subject of debate. While it is agreed that the laws that govern isolated quantum systems ...

(Phys.org)—In an attempt to harvest the kinetic energy of airflow, researchers have demonstrated the ability to harvest energy directly from the vibrations of a flexible, piezoelectric beam placed in a wind tunnel. While ...

Possibly relevant: Cartels are an emergent phenomenon. I'm somehow allergic to "emergent" concept because its mechanism is essentially undefined in the same way, like the behaviour of "parallel universe" and many other concepts, which are widely used in physics today. The mechanism of cartel formation is similar to traffic jam problem.

Exxon netted over nine billion dollars in a three month period in 2007. The practice is known as "gouging", and this is the kind of article they adore- "You see, it's market forces that are out of our control." Fat liars! It costs two or three dollars per barrel to extract the oil out of the ground, and after that, it's a free-for-all in mark-ups. Any other industry or commodity would be shut down for the same violations, but thanks to oil industry lobbying of our pristine House and Senate, they can charge whatever they please.

"...its mechanism is essentially undefined in the same way, like the behaviour of "parallel universe" and many other concepts, which are widely used in physics today." - TkClick The concept of parallel universe(s) is NOT widely accepted in physics, but is gaining ground. Eastern Europe was the source of great strides in chemistry and physics, but research was also suppressed in the satellites of the Soviet era. You need to break free of that for your own personal evolution as a scientist.

> Any other industry or commodity would be shut down for the same violations

If there isn't a monopoly, and there isn't collusion, then in the US sellers are generally free to sell commodities at whatever price they like without being shut down and without having to lobby the House and Senate.

How about the impact of progressive government/environmentalist types baning the construction of new refineries? How about progressive government/environmentalists types baning the drilling for oil in the US? How about other crazy regulations by progressives? It would be funny if it wasn't so crazy, that progressives who CAUSE prices to go up, then complain about high prices!

"Still, it paled in comparison to the $175 million spent by the oil and gas industry, which opposed the pollution caps that would be required in a bill by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass. and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. ExxonMobil alone spent $27.4 million."- USA Today (2010) And there IS collusion- between the oil companies and the corrupt lawmakers that Americans have put their trust in.

How about the impact of progressive government/environmentalist types baning the construction of new refineries? How about progressive government/environmentalists types baning the drilling for oil in the US? How about other crazy regulations by progressives? It would be funny if it wasn't so crazy, that progressives who CAUSE prices to go up, then complain about high prices!

-freethinking

We progressives also believe in education for all, so that everyone will know how to spell "banning" correctly.

While Economists have decided that it is moral and proper for Corporations to steal as much money from the consumer as possible, some feel that it is wrong for elected politicians to assist them in doing so.

Why are the American people voting for people who are assisting the Corporations in stealing their money?

Is it a case of mass insanity? Or are the American people just becoming dumber and dumber with each passing day, and are no longer capable of governing themselves?

"And there IS collusion- between the oil companies and the corrupt lawmakers that Americans have put their trust in." - Telekenetic

While I admit I have problems with spelling and gramar, VD and most progressives have problems with definitions, and logic.

VD Please name the Economists who have said it is moral and proper for corporations to steal?

I agree Americans are easy to fool, they voted for Obama didn't they, but they do wise up after a while. Now that they have seen what radical progressive looks like and have seen their hate and distructive ways, and no longer believe their lies, they are swinging back to sanity. November will be the proof of that!

It's spelled "grammar" and "destructive". If you want to be taken seriously and not be thought of as a fifth grade dropout, take some remedial reading classes, otherwise whatever you write I tend to dismiss out of hand.

Similar to ticket scalping from the view of artificial scarcity. Buy everything driving up the price then Dutch auction the market. Most markets are experiencing contrived artificial scarcity. The low volume/speed buyer can't compete with the high volume/speed buyer/seller.

Sigfpe,But, there is a monoply/cartel (OPEC) which controls production and world prices.Our companies sell on the world market and base their prices on the world market, not on cost of production.

Thats exactly right. In a normal market, lets say, sunglasses, someone says "Hey I can make sunglasses for cheaper than everyone else, and Im willing to take a smaller profit on a larger scale so I will sell them for cheap." Meanwhile, the oil companies say "I can produce/extract this oil for a certain amount, I can store large quantities of it, and I can charge the same or slightly less than everyone else and make lots of money. Why would I sell it for less?" The oil companies prices are based on the world market, but they set their prices to take full advantage of any situation. A prime example is when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf of Mexico, and within 24 hours gas prices went up all over the place. Was the supply affected immediately? No. But their prices are set by the market

" A prime example is when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf of Mexico, and within 24 hours gas prices went up all over the place. Was the supply affected immediately? No. But their prices are set by the market"-Krundoloss In this instance it is considered "price gouging", when a necessary commodity is inflated during an emergency and is ILLEGAL. Oil companies and distributors should have been prosecuted, but their buddy, George W., an oilman himself, did absolutely nothing. Know your history before using it to bolster your argument.

Social "scientists" are very progressive. Practical scientists and engineering types are typically conservative.

For the progressives that have problems with my spelling, I hate to let you know but your not important enough for me to spend much time spell checking for you. I run two successful businesses.

That said however, Einstein and I have at least two things in common. 1. both of us are poor spellers, and both of us cant remember phone numbers. So if VD wants to suggest poor spelling makes one stupid, then I'm in good company with Einstein.

At least I'm not like VD who sits in his parents basement spell checking every word he types, between his mom yelling at him to clean up his room, trying to make himself look smart.

" A prime example is when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf of Mexico, and within 24 hours gas prices went up all over the place. Was the supply affected immediately? No. But their prices are set by the market"-Krundoloss In this instance it is considered "price gouging", when a necessary commodity is inflated during an emergency and is ILLEGAL. Oil companies and distributors should have been prosecuted, but their buddy, George W., an oilman himself, did absolutely nothing. Know your history before using it to bolster your argument.

Dude, you are agreeing with me. I think its price-gouging too, there just nothing to stop them. That was my point.

Creating artificial scarcity is now the primary tactic of Industry. It is accomplished though a variety of methods, but the most insideus is through the creation of alternate brands specifically to fragment the market, produce false choice, and to allow the industry to either charge higher prices for replacement parts or design their products specifically to fail and in a manner that can not be serviced, in order to foster future sales.

What is sold as "innovation" is more and more commonly just a rehash of features from earlier models that consumers have long forgotten about.

This is how the modern corporate farmer controls the consumption of his livestock.

In this instance it is considered "price gouging", when a necessary commodity is inflated

This is not gouging. Such pricing is the best way to ration necessary commodities.If there were a shortage of bottled water in NO, which their was, companies like Wal Mart DONATED time and water for relief.But, if a bottle of water was $10, how many companies and entrepreneurs would be shipping has much water as they could at that price? And with such an influx of supply, the prices would quickly drop.From the consumer side, such price increases would signal they should conserve and not waste such a costly resource.Gouging laws make socialists feel good and prolong the shortages of valuable commodities.

"The owners of 18 Illinois gas stations face a decision on Thursday: Admit to illegally raising prices at the pump after Hurricane Katrina and make a $1,000 donation to charity, or declare their innocence and face the possibility of even bigger expenses in the form of a state lawsuit. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan last month sent letters to 18 gas stations informing them that they could avoid being sued for alleged violation of consumer protection laws by donating $1,000 to the American Red Cross and signing an assurance of voluntary compliance -- essentially an admission of price gouging."- ABC News 1/4/2005

"A prime example is when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf of Mexico, and within 24 hours gas prices went up all over the place." - KrundoTard

I am not excusing it, i think it is intrinsically wrong. Prices should only go up when supply has truly been affected, not when the supply drop is speculative and has not yet occurred. I despise the oil companies, i would never excuse them. No other enitity is driven by greed more than these companies. How much technology has been buried, bought or snuffed out so they can keep thier strangle hold on the world!

"The owners of 18 Illinois gas stations face a decision on Thursday: Admit to illegally raising prices at the pump after Hurricane Katrina and make a $1,000 donation to charity, or declare their innocence and face the possibility of even bigger expenses in the form of a state lawsuit. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan last month sent letters to 18 gas stations informing them that they could avoid being sued for alleged violation of consumer protection laws by donating $1,000 to the American Red Cross and signing an assurance of voluntary compliance -- essentially an admission of price gouging."- ABC News 1/4/2005

"In its investigation, the FTC found no instances of illegal market manipulation that led to higher prices during the relevant time periods ""the post-hurricane gasoline price increases at the national and regional levels were approximately what would be predicted by the standard supply-and-demand model of a market performing competitively. "http://www.ftc.go...ces.shtm

This study had strong similarities to the 'Condon Report' that ex president Nixon tried to sell the nation back in 1968. It was later learned that the scholars that put this together worked to a pre-arranged quid-pro-quo conclusion. Stacking chosen 'evidence' and using every sleazy debate trick of rigged debating that would have made their boss, Tricky Dikky Nixon and their mentor, Joseph Goebbels the old nazi propagandist proud of them, these prostitute professors 'delivered the pizza' exactly the way the republicans wanted. And so it is with gas prices. This is just another devious attempt to convince Joe Lunchmeat that the monopolies are 'not at fault' for raising prices suddenly just before holidays, and dropping prices steeply just before national elections with oil monopolist interests at stake...like making sure their paid in the shade stooges slime back in on the cemetery vote in low turnout voter suppressed elections.

So the consensus seems to be that: oil companies behave the way they do because they can and they make more money doing what they currently do. We all agree that this is a normal way for a commodity market to operate, but that it seems unfair to the consumer. Yes economics dictate that when a resource is scarce, high prices reduce shortages. But when we have reserves......a price increase should not be necessary. It all boils down to military readiness. If we are cut off from OPEC, we can continue to operate internally off our reserves. Who pays the price? Everyone, but atleast our (USA) imperialist government will have reserves if its is ever needed. But what do I know, Im just computer tech....

I'm no economist, but it seems to me, they charge whatever they think the economy can support. If they err on the conservative side, the results are missed profits. If they err on the aggressive side, demand destruction ensues. People will do without, seek alternatives etc. I laugh when the MSM reports consumption is down do to weak demand do economic slowdown. Truth is, when analysts report unemployment is up, discretionary spending is down, this indicates demand destruction is imminent.No conspiracy required, they know what you, the collective public can support.

We progressives also believe in education for all, so that everyone will know how to spell "banning" correctly.

It appears you may have forgotten one grammar rule your "progressive education" should have taught you: ending a sentence with a prepositional phrase should not be done.And speaking of the never-ending progressive education for all quest, progressives behave much as a cartel, dictating where and how much an individual's money must go.

Whether it be the great "cap and trade" carbon offset scam or complaints against the "1%", too many progressives have "I know better-than-you" and "big bully" tendencies.

Actually most parts do not interchange, and virtually no parts are available.

Where can I get a new trigger for any of their drills? Or a new thermal fuse for the battery compartment? Where can I get a new bearing? Chuck? GearBox, Impact plate? Charger cord? Charger plates? Charger controller?

Which of these things are inter-changeable between models when they all perform the same function within each model?

"Prepositional Phrases - Arranging Prepositional Phrasesgrammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/a/preppharrange.htm However, like adverbs, prepositional phrases that modify verbs can also be found at the very beginning or very end of a sentence.

Answer: Planned Obsolescence as a means of producing artificial shortage.

No, the answer is quality.Quality is meeting the needs of the customer. Should a drill needed by a homeowner once a year be designed the same as one needed every day by a factory?How 'Planned Obsolescence' any different than entropy? Nothing can last forever.

You'd have to be blind, dumb, or a paid stooge not to see planned obsolescence in personal computer manufacturing. The landfills are full of them.

Never worked in design or manufacture have you?Ever wonder why a space satellite is so expensive? It MUST be designed to last for years in a hostile environment with no opportunity to be repaired. So sure, a computer could be made to last for 10 years, but would you be willing to pay for it? Especially after new technology has already made it obsolete?

I wonder what RyggTard thinks about the designers of ink jet cartridges, or model of the month cell phones.

"Never worked in design or manufacture have you?" - RyggTard

Gosh RyggTard. Why is it that whenever I do a quick scan of the keyboards available at my local retailer the models appear to have changed.

Is it really necessary to constantly redesign every keyboard every few months when there have been no improvements in design or quality for the last 20 years or more?

It is magical how the maximal efficiency of the marketplace manages to keep hundreds of keyboard designers at work designing new keyboards with slightly different shapes that all perform exactly the same function, and all of which are essentially interchangable.

Odd too isn't it that HP inkjet cartridges just continue to change shape model after model when the ink and the actual working part of the head itself remains exactly the same. Odd too that it costs me $20 for a new print head but can refill for $.80

Planned obsolescence"Planned obsolescence is a business strategy in which the obsolescence (the process of becoming obsoletethat is, unfashionable or no longer usable) of a product is planned and built into it from its conception. This is done so that in future the consumer feels a need to purchase new products and services that the manufacturer brings out as replacements for the old ones." = The Economist

In the 1930s an enterprising engineer working for General Electric proposed increasing sales of flashlight lamps by increasing their efficiency and shortening their life. Instead of lasting through three batteries he suggested that each lamp last only as long as one battery. In 1934 speakers at the Society of Automotive Engineers meetings proposed limiting the life of automobiles. These examples and others are cited in Vance Packard's classic book The Waste Makers.

In an editorial in Design News toward the end of the fifties, E. S. Safford asked whether engineers should resist the philosophy of planned obsolescence if their management commissioned a 'short-term product' and argued that they should not: "Planned existence spans of product may well become one of the greatest economic boosts to the American economy since the origination of time payments." What was required, he argued was "a new look at old engineering ethics". Instead of trying to build the best, the lightest, the fastest and the cheapest, engineers should be able to apply their skills to building shoddy articles that would fall apart after a short amount of time, all in the interests of the market.

In August this year (1998) the business magazine Fortune reported on how planned obsolescence is becoming "increasingly sophisticated". In a column, Paul Lukas describes how "many manufacturers, no longer content to spur repeat sales simply by making consumer goods that break down or wear out, now offer products that tell the consumer when they're breaking down or wearing out." For example, Gillette's new shaving cartridge has a blue stripe that fades indicating it needs replacing, whether it does in fact or not. In InfoWorld magazine columnist Ed Foster suggests that the computer industry often makes relatively recent computer systems obsolete by discontinuing parts or accessories for them."

Planned Obsolescence, a trend started and encouraged in the 1920's by the Phoebus cartel, a group of light bulb manufacturing comapnies, is very much alive today.Not only companies manufacture products of lower quality than technologically possible, but they do it intentionally. The sooner something breaks, the sooner we will need to replace it, of course, just outside the warranty period

Yes. In fact doing so would reduce design and manufacturing costs since the design would not change substantially over time, and would be common to virtually all drills.

And doing so would allow a drill purchased today to be passed on to your children and grand children.

"Should a drill needed by a homeowner once a year be designed the same as one needed every day by a factory?" - RyggTard

I have an old Black and Decker drill that is older than I am. It still works fine because it was designed with a metal transmission, and ball bearings rather than current Dewalt drills that use plastic gears and sleeve bearings and which will be dead in a few years.

You get what you pay for ... even higher end companies produce cheap short lived garbage. Higher end DeWalts are still the best. Any of the hammer and higher voltage models will have steel gears and ball bearings. The masses don't want to pay for quality anymore it seems. Good engineering and good materials used to be standard practice (overbuilt), now stuff largely is designed to be just good enough under hypothetical idealistic conditions. These are rarely seen in actual use, so durability takes a hit.

But that is a contrived difference. It costs virtually no difference to manufacture a hardened drill over another.

The reason for the difference is the need by Dewalt to create artificial levels of product so that profits can be maximized by selling minimally different products for vastly higher prices.

"Higher end DeWalts are still the best. Any of the hammer and higher voltage models will have steel gears and ball bearings." - xen

A friend of mine once purchased a stereo system and found that the quality of the audio was not up to his expectations. This was in the era when manufacturers actually included a schematic of their product so that it could be repaired. In any case, he noticed that the manufacturer had soldered two capacitors across the outputs of his model for the express purpose of reducing the quality of the audio output.

That is what the customer's want.Sounds like most here want to force all companies to manufacture mil-spec products that will cost 10 times what the consumer wants to pay for.I know I will never buy another cordless drill as the battery technology changes too often.

"Never worked in design or manufacture have you?"- Ryggesqn2 As a matter of fact, I've designed AND manufactured a number of products, sold and shipped them nationally, and exhibited them at trade shows, all the while knowing that they could be enjoyed by successive generations.

Ven - you sure that the 2 weren't soldered there to bring capacitance up to spec ... ie (2) 20uF's in parallel to equal a spec'd 40uF? As far as sound quality goes, an ABX test (hard to do with hardware) or barring that, an oscilloscope, is the only fair way to hear or measure differences. Many people think louder sounds better which could be the case with your friend.

By the way .. do you call your friend a tard too or are we just special?

"Never worked in design or manufacture have you?"- Ryggesqn2 As a matter of fact, I've designed AND manufactured a number of products, sold and shipped them nationally, and exhibited them at trade shows, all the while knowing that they could be enjoyed by successive generations.

I've been following and reading about computer technology for years and years, and have never read anything to date regarding Ven's ...

"In a more modern example, Intel has been repeatedly caught selling high speed CPU's as lower speed CPU's if their yields of high speed CPU's are too high."

Each CPU is tested before packaging with an entire battery of tests, ran at highest designed clock speed. If it fails, frequency is dropped til it passes, and that frequency is stamped on the casing. It's possible that Intel did do as you said to make up for shortages of a particular frequency, but I don't see how selling a high speed one as a lower speed one hurts the consumer. With corporations, anything is possible, and only Intel knows the true story.

So whats next, conspiracy to underclock CPU's to force upgrades? Overclockers can get anywhere from 4-5 GHZ on a 2 GHz and greater CPU if cooled properly ...

The Rebinning of Intel CPU's has long been known in the industry. It is better to redistribute higher performing cores to lower performing bins in order to keep the market filled with lower performing parts and keep the margins on higher performing cores at a premium.

I have never encountered a customer who want's a product that is designed to fail before it needs to, just as I have never encountered a consumer who want's a product that is priced higher than it should be.

"That is what the customer's want." - RyggTard

But Libertraian/Randite RyggTard apparently has.

Is that the basis of Libertarian Economics? Is that why it has been such a spectacular failure for America and everwhere else it has been employed in even the smallest way?

Consumers seek to get the highest quality product possible at the lowest price.

Corporations seek to produce the worst possible product and sell it at the highest possible price.

If a Libertarian Corporatist / Fascist state, the above two facts produce the worst possible outcome for the consumer.

"This was in the era when manufacturers actually included a schematic of their product so that it could be repaired"

.. you said his amp came with schematics which SHOULD provide data on the components such as resistance and capacitance. My 35 YO pioneer amp (SA7800) did on its schematic. If you totally smoke a resistor for instance, you won't be able to read the color bands, and that's another function of the schematics, besides physical connections.

CPU's are amortized to cover all the machines required to fab plus engineering, testing, and marketing, etc plus the overhead of multimillion dollar salaries in the front office ... so I don't think it's nearly as cut and dried as you make out, but then again I'm not in their accounting department, and neither are you. Intel didn't have serious competition til AMD became a contender, and ever since then Intel (and AMD) have put out faster, cheaper processors.